Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1              3              38       39       end
  

Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions

  
 
this is me
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions



philwaring wrote:
The shot with the 2x on the 400 looks really good. Based on that one I would have no problem using the 400 with a 2x as my primary way to 800 rather than coveting a 600 with a 1.4x.


I thought this as well. However, I donít remember the 600E and with 1.4xTC was this soft when I had the combo so I looked at the images again and found that the 600E and 1.4x is severely backfocused.

I understand itís very very difficult to do this kind of test. Takes a lot of effort to do the shoot and organization afterward to show the result so thatís itís one to one.
The only way to know is to actually buy the lens and use it.



Feb 19, 2022 at 09:34 AM
this is me
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions







I know the backlighting is tough but Iím very concerned about the CA seen on the upper right branches.



Feb 19, 2022 at 09:36 AM
suteetat
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


this is me wrote:
https://morboi.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/NZ9_0445.jpg
I know the backlighting is tough but Iím very concerned about the CA seen on the upper right branches.


I think CA is a compromise in the lens design nowaday. I mentioned this elsewhere as well that when I played with a
demo Sony 400/2.8GM when it first became available, before lens correction profile came out in PS, it also showed
very strong CA. Once lens correction profile is available, you don't see CA anymore and I have not seen anyone complained.
I posted an example picture of that long time ago on Sony forum here even.

My dealer mentioned this to me many many times that Z lens relies quite heavily on software correction for things like
CA rather than optical/physical correction in lens design.

I don't know if the CA is part of the compromise for weight reduction or not but like Sony and the new Canon, middle group elements are moved further back so they are smaller and lighter. That may affect CA correction perhaps, I don't really know.




Feb 19, 2022 at 05:17 PM
suteetat
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


philwaring wrote:
Thanks for doing these!

It looks like the lighting changed a bit between that first 600mm bare shot and the 400 with the internal TC. The 2nd one is a bit darker and there's less reflection on the white part of the eye. I think this probably makes the 400 come off a little worse than it should in that comparison. This difference may have contributed to the AF being less likely to hop onto the eye.

The shot with the 2x on the 400 looks really good. Based on that one I would have no problem using the 400 with a
...Show more

The test certainly is not definitive and more meticulous person certainly could do a much better job. But I think the test shows that 400/2.8 with TC is not bad at all and unless 600/4s outperform 600/4e FL significantly, I am not sure that I would worry about getting 600/4S in the future. I am still interest in 800PF but it really depends on weight and price. If it weight more than 2.5 kg, it would be less attractive I think but if it is closer to 2 kg I might have to sell my kidney




Feb 19, 2022 at 05:24 PM
bernardl
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions




this is me wrote:
https://morboi.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/NZ9_0445.jpg
I know the backlighting is tough but Iím very concerned about the CA seen on the upper right branches.


I wonder how these images were converted. Was it LR or C1 pro?

If itís LR then no concern. If itís C1 Pro then what were the lens correction settings?

As far as sharpness goes I know these tests are difficult but would probably redo the 400mm with internal TC, focus seems a little off also. And I would expect that combo to be sharper than 400mm + 2x TC and it isnít.



Feb 19, 2022 at 05:36 PM
suteetat
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


bernardl wrote:
I wonder how these images were converted. Was it LR or C1 pro?

If itís LR then no concern. If itís C1 Pro then what were the lens correction settings?

As far as sharpness goes I know these tests are difficult but would probably redo the 400mm with internal TC, focus seems a little off also. And I would expect that combo to be sharper than 400mm + 2x TC and it isnít.


I use PS as I shoot in HE+ now.
I think I need a better subject but not sure what is best. Stuff animal seems like a good idea but to have 2 lenses focus right at the same spot seems rather difficult as well and almost always different depth of the fur will be in focus usually so getting the identical plane of focus on something that is not completely flat is more difficult than I expected.




Feb 19, 2022 at 05:50 PM
George DeCamp
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


Looks great I'm very psyched about it! Haven't heard a peep from NPS yet though! 🤷‍♂️


Feb 19, 2022 at 07:39 PM
suteetat
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


I had a lot of fun today with pied kingfishers.
AF at 3-5m distance is still problematic but further away it is excellent.
Regardless of teh problem, I came here several times in the past with D850, D6, 500/4e FL and 600/e FL and today is the most productive by far and I got some shots that I never could managed with my DSLR in the past.

This series is with 400/2.8 with no TC. 1/2000, f2.8, iso 125.
All was cropped to around 24-26mp so not quite a dx crop.

























Eye focus was a bit off closer to the end of the series in comparison to the beginning.



Feb 20, 2022 at 01:19 AM
suteetat
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


With Internal TC.
I am impressed. Once focus is acquired, it does not lose the subject easily.
The first series, I tracked the pied kingfisher as it came out of the water and flew to a branch right in front of me and I got 40 odd shots that the bird was all in focus. The eyes may not all be tack sharp but reasonable I think.

All shot at 1/3200, iso 200, f4, 560mm with internal TC. All had some cropping.

























A few more random shots with internal TC engaged.

















Feb 20, 2022 at 02:21 AM
suteetat
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


A couple more with internal TC and external TCx2 at 1120mm, f8, no cropping.














Feb 20, 2022 at 02:26 AM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

Luftwalk
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


Excellent images @suteetat
I'm really surprised by how the combo with the internal and external 2x TC came out. The 400 is proving to be very versatile indeed.



Feb 20, 2022 at 02:57 AM
suteetat
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


Here is one with TCx2, no internal TC at 800mm. It was a bit earlier in the morning.
1/1250, iso1000, f5.6, cropped to about 30mp.








Feb 20, 2022 at 06:10 AM
AcuteShadows
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


suteetat wrote:
I did a quick comparison between 600/4e FL with and without TC14e iii and 400/2.8s with internal TC and external TC combination. Not very scientific but hopefully it will give some idea.

https://morboi.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/NZ9_0635.jpg

This is the basic set up. On Video fluid head as I don't have any ball head that is stable enough for big tele lens. Single point focus on the owl's right eye. I tried to position the right eye as close to the center as possible. 5s delayed iso 64, shutterspeed around 1/13-1/20 mostly. All shot wide opened.

600mm comparison ( well 600 vs 560 mm actually, using internal
...Show more

Great to see a real life comparison! I think the focus plane is a little bit different from one photo to the other. At that distance, only a small part of the white area of the eye is actually in focus, and the focus planes may differ by just one or two millimeters.



Feb 20, 2022 at 08:15 AM
suteetat
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions








With internal TC and TCx2, aproximately dx cropped, 1/3200, iso 1250, f8 I ran the picture through Topaz denoise.

AF is still quite reasonable with 2 TC. I was able to track kingfisher hovering but it was even at longer distance and detail just got lost but still I am quite impresssed with AF.



Feb 22, 2022 at 07:37 AM
mach250
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


suteetat wrote:
My dealer mentioned this to me many many times that Z lens relies quite heavily on software correction for things like
CA rather than optical/physical correction in lens design.



This is something I've wondered since the Z line was released. It's just my impression but ever since I saw posts like this I've felt that the image quality from the Z system was enhanced in camera. Don't get me wrong, I've had a very minimal list of negatives, but I'm not alone in feeling the images have a clinical or almost too good of a look to them.



Feb 22, 2022 at 08:02 AM
Alistair1
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


Cameralabs review.

https://www.cameralabs.com/nikon-z-400mm-f2-8-tc-vr-s-review/



Feb 23, 2022 at 03:40 PM
Lance B
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


Suteetat, have you used the 400 f2.8E FL VR version? If so, can you comment on the weight of the lens hood of both? I would imagine the new 400 f2.8S TC lens hood is much lighter than the old 400 f2.8E FL VR, which was quite heavy and robust. The new hood needing to be lighter as the overall lens is much lighter.


Feb 23, 2022 at 04:35 PM
Kasper6188
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


mach250 wrote:
This is something I've wondered since the Z line was released. It's just my impression but ever since I saw posts like this I've felt that the image quality from the Z system was enhanced in camera. Don't get me wrong, I've had a very minimal list of negatives, but I'm not alone in feeling the images have a clinical or almost too good of a look to them.


I'm on board with this too. I just see overcorrected almost soul-less images. Long live F mount and the FTZ!!



Feb 23, 2022 at 07:04 PM
AcuteShadows
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


Kasper6188 wrote:
I'm on board with this too. I just see overcorrected almost soul-less images. Long live F mount and the FTZ!!


This issue is due to Nikon using in-camera image processing technology to make lenses lighter and smaller. The 14-30mm f/4 makes the most aggressive use of that technology.

It is, however, not a Z mount vs. F mount issue. The 50mm f/1.2, for example, has almost no distortion (on a par, if not better, than the 105mm MC).



Feb 23, 2022 at 07:19 PM
suteetat
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Official Nikon 400/2.8S image thread + some discussions


Lance B wrote:
Suteetat, have you used the 400 f2.8E FL VR version? If so, can you comment on the weight of the lens hood of both? I would imagine the new 400 f2.8S TC lens hood is much lighter than the old 400 f2.8E FL VR, which was quite heavy and robust. The new hood needing to be lighter as the overall lens is much lighter.


I don't have 400/2.8e FL. I had 500/4e FL and currently has 600/4e FL.
The hood on 400/2.8s is probably somewhere around 100g++ lighter and the material is thinner than 600/4 hood.
I love the balance of 400/2.8s though. It is roughly the same weight as 200/2 VR ii and 500/4e FL but I find that it is
easier to handhold 400/2.8s than either lens and is much much easier to handhold than 600/4e FL despite only 800+ g
difference.






Feb 23, 2022 at 08:28 PM
1              3              38       39       end






FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1              3              38       39       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.